Indian Blogs Slam TV Coverage of Mumbai Blasts
Sujatha Bagal
Right from the time the story of the Mumbai blasts of Tuesday, July 11 broke, it was the headliner in all of the Indian television channels. As it should be. From the coverage, it was quite obvious that television camera and crew managed to get to the blast sites much quicker than any of the emergency or law and order personnel in the city.
TV channels also became conduits for sending and receiving messages through text messaging at a time when calling facilities on cell phone networks and landlines were down. Scores of people succeeded in reaching their families and friends and satisfying themselves that they were all right. For this, the channels deserve kudos.
In times of crisis, citizens turn to television channels for news and information quite automatically. What with all the technological innovations, satellite systems, on site broadcasting systems, etc., and more importantly, with the onset of 24-hour news channels, it is becoming the norm that television channels stick with a story not for minutes or hours, but for days on end, sending reporters to chase down and present each tiny new bit of information (which is then duly "flashed" at the bottom of the screen under the monicker "breaking news").
But when does this coverage cross the line? When does it all become too much? What are the situations in which media channels should exercise restraint and say, "This much and no more?"
Going by the voices in the Indian blogosphere that have spoken over the past three days on this issue, it appears that the Indian television channels did cross the line in their coverage of the Mumbai blasts.
The complaints fall into two broad categories:
- Television channels exercising no restraint when it came to showing gory images of broken bodies and bloodied body parts; and
- Anchors and reporters harping on the "exclusivity" of the images shown on their television channel and plugging the fact that their images were being shown worldwide.
Mumbai Help quite simply asks that the display of mangled bodies on television be stopped. Kishore at All in a Day's Work writes about the television coverage of the Mumbai blasts and of the death of Suryanarayana, the Indian engineer kidnapped and executed by the Taliban in Afghanistan,
Media is in the business of generating revenues. It's the bottom line which matters. And anything that creates a sensation, sells. Anything that demonstrates a conflict, sells. Anything that gets glorified, sells. Anything that instills a fear, sells. Conflict sells. Peace is boring.Mridula at Travel Tales from India, horrified at the gory images she saw on television no matter what channel she turned to, put up links to blogs that had already written about the issue and appealed to other bloggers to blog about it as well,
If you turn on the TV it is all over the place. No, I do not mean the news. I mean showing the dead bodies of the blast victims with scant regard for human dignity. I think here is one small issue where we, the people who blog can make a small difference.From her post and from some of the comments left there, here are a couple of the voices. Please do read the rest of her post.I have an appeal for you. If you blog and if you feel strongly about the way Indian news channels (almost all) are beaming the images of the dead, blog about it. If enough number of people do it, someone somewhere has to take notice. We have done it before and if we care about it we can do it again. I am willing to aggregate as many links as possible on this issue along with this post.
Pooja Agarwal at Travel Memoirs comments on Zee TV's coverage,
They were actually showing dead bodies lying on the track and injured people being dragged to rescue. Even sitting this far from my country, I could not help but feel for everyone back home who were probably seeing these images continuously and how disturbing they must be for everyone.Insane Mind writes on the crassness that pervaded the coverage,
The media coverage of the terrorist attack and its aftermath was crass, to say the least. I had watched the news channels for a long time, getting number, seeing the same gruesome images being aired over and over again. The media has lost its control, and its humanity.Of all television channels and anchors, the choicest brickbats seem to be reserved for CNN/IBN and its head Rajdeep Sardesai.
I was bemused at first and then dismayed at the importance CNN/IBN was giving to its own (in its view) pre-eminence in the Indian television field. I was aware of Sardesai's tendency to puff up with self-importance in the presence of celebrities (his interview with Imran Khan and Kapil Dev was painful to watch at times), but it took on rather alarming proportions on Tuesday night.
Emma questions the need for gore and writes that such displays end up disrespecting the dead. Buchu found Sardesai's coverage annoying. Sukumar simply says, "Rajdeep Sardesai takes this opportunity to sing praises on his channel CNN-IBN." News describes CNN/IBN's bloody coverage,
Rajdeep was anchoring from one of the bombed first class coaches. He kept on pointing at and showing blood splashed window glasses of the train for a good 10 minutes. As if this was not enough, what followed were blood smeared bodies of injured people. Then there were limbs and other body parts of the dead on the platforms and rail tracks. Blood blood and more blood.Gaurav Sabnis at Vantage Point notes,
7:42 - Rajdeep Sardesai on CNN-IBN - "These pictures are now being beamed on all CNN networks all over the world. Indians all over the world watching CNN are now watching CNN-IBN. This is the power of CNN-IBN". Yes Rajdeep, we are very proud of you. Your timing for patting yourself on the back is admirable.Amit Varma at India Uncut berates Sardesai for bragging about "how 'this is the power of a global news organisation. These pictures are going out across the world thanks to CNN-IBN.'"
Starship Enterprise presents an alternative view. Writing in response to Mridula's post, he/she writes that displaying the gore stemming from terrorist attacks such as the Mumbai blasts is necessary for a reality check,
Bloodshed is a excruciatingly real image of a bomb blast. To skim over it like it didn't exist would be to overlook the reality and cower in a safe corner of comfort. We, who are fortunate enough to be alive, should not shy away from gory images because they shock our complacent sensibilities.Pradeep Nair, commenting on Kishore's post writes that viewers, sitting in the comfort of their living rooms, have the wrong idea about journalists and the work they do,
I am a journalist and I must admit, on occasions, we do get carried away by events. So, constantly we have to remind ourselves to be restrained. This is most apparent in the case of the TV, much less on the radio; and to some extent in the print. This "getting carried away" phenomenon is nothing new. Only that in this TV era, it is so much more visible to the common person.BongoPundit has an excellent post/round-up on media and the Mumbai blasts in general. Sepia Mutiny comments on the deafening silence in the western blogosphere, and Curious Gawker points to the inane commentary at one of the few non-Indian blogs that did write about the blasts. Please do read.One reason for the wrong perception is, I feel, the journalist is there right at the spot, in the thick of events... while the viewer or reader is in the comforts of the home. It's only natural viewers react the way they do. But it will be good, if they understand that facts are different.
There is one point few people realise: The very things that make people view a programme are precisely the things that they don't like. It's ironic, but true. Take the punch or the most captivating aspect out of the programme or article, you won't watch it or read it. Then, no criticism, no applause.
What are your thoughts on the role of media at times such as these? How much is too much and do viewers really need to see every last detail, no matter how graphic, of every story? Is this a function of the 24/7 news cycle?
If you notice other blogs on this issue, please do leave the link in the comments section.
Indian Blogs Slam TV Coverage of Mumbai Blasts
RSS:
- Subscribe to RSS 2.0 feeds for:
- » Comments on this article
- » Media
- » Culture: Desi
- » Culture: Society
- » Media: Blogs
- » Media: Journalism
- » Media: Television
- » Desicritics.org articles by Sujatha Bagal
- » All News articles
- » All Desicritics.org articles











Apollo
URL
July 14, 2006
12:05 PM
I agree that TV and the Media should be more responsible while reporting. I think being human beings they do get carried away by the moment and do things that even they might not have done otherwise.
Plus about showing dead bodies, body parts and injured people. it is war and war is dirty and revolting. we need to shown those images. we cannot and should not ask for a sanitised coverage of the mayhem. people should be shocked into action else they might end up thinking 200 people being blown to bits is not a big deal after all. sad but that is human nature.
Sumanth
URL
July 14, 2006
04:25 PM
Looks like Indian Blogosphere is getting into first phase of maturity.
Let me assure you all, the TV Media will not change.
The issue is not just about profits and revenues.
The issue is much bigger than that and it has to do with "human nature".
The journalists preparing and reporting go on an addictive "EGO TRIP" which gives them a feeling of "being powerful" and "being in charge of inlfuencing millions".
This is a dangerous Addiction.
Today, most journalists including journalists who blog think that, they only know who to create a better society and all others and dumb assholes.
This attitude of journalists will not change.
So what is the way out?
Create Media Watch groups and alternate medias which give more and more counter views.
---------
Why media is dumb?
The job of Media is to sense and create awareness. Its job is not to influence people.
Teh job of a "stethoscope" is to sense heart beat and inform.
Imagine, what will happen if the stethoscope takes over the doctor and starts prescribing medicine.
---------
Media works on a "lower order model". That is, media uses "very narrow time windows" to dervie conclusions and hence recommends solutions which are ineffective.
Its like a game of chess. Media is an entity which thinks 2 or 3 steps ahead. The the system or society as a mind thinks many steps (20 or 30 or more) ahead.
So, the solutions by "Lower order predictor" Media often contribute to the problem.
In fact, terrorists and criminals use media to create panic and intolerance in society as they think more steps ahead than media.
temporal
URL
July 14, 2006
04:33 PM
sumanth:
i would agree with this with a caveat
Let me assure you all, the TV Media will not change.
the media will not change...
the change will occur in the viewer....as they become discerning...
while there would still be tv stations following 'blood and gore sells' dictums...others would create their own niche...and constituency...as happens here...pbs, fox, cnn,cbc, ctv etc...all have their niche and their markets
Preeti
July 15, 2006
01:41 AM
Temporal
I disagree with you!!
TV reporters are on an EGO TRIP. Let me site an example. I was in one of the city airports and some cricketers were arriving . I had arrived there and on my out I found a crowd waiting to get a glimpse of them. So I too joined in.
Much to my dismay , the journos wanted to push us out coz they wanted to get the front row. We refused and they said it is their right to get the front row. Why i do not know? Coz I consider them commom man too. First cum first place booked.
They managed to push us out and they use very very very very filthy language and reporters from rival channels are at each others throats. They even get physical to push us out .
Rajdeep I thought had a great start, today I think he is a mere polished politician's PA giving his personal views to influence the minds of the viewers. He is sold out.
Preeti
July 15, 2006
01:43 AM
Correction:
Rajdeep I thought had a great start, today I think he is a mere politician's polished PA giving his personal views to influence the minds of the viewers. He is sold out.
Apollo
URL
July 15, 2006
02:09 AM
well put preeti and the same holds for NDTV too. Barkha dutt started out very well too especially in Kargil but then she soon sold her soul too. In gujarat i was shocked to see her provoking people by trying to put words into their mouth.
The same tactic was used recently in Bangalore by Nupur Basu she was provoking and cajoling a psychlogist into telling that all south indians were fanatics. the smart doctor did not bite her bait and put her down expertly.
Also prannoy roy he started out well to with his "The world this week" but then look at him now. pathetic.
Siva
URL
July 16, 2006
02:39 AM
I on the other hand think that it is imperative to show the gory images to the outside world so that it will hit them hard, without causing any damage, and make them relies what happens when barbarians comes calling and we keep ignoring their visits. May be this will help Indians to elect themselves a government that can protect them. Not like the current imbeciles we have.
Siva
URL
July 16, 2006
02:43 AM
Apollo
I am not sure whether you are aware of this - P Roy's wife is own sister of that crazy commie Brinda Karat. That will give you an idea why he became like this.
Apollo
URL
July 16, 2006
04:44 AM
thanks siva. i knew that. The whole rotten bunch have their HQ in the JNU. It is to the commies what Nuremberg was to the Nazis.
temporal
URL
July 16, 2006
10:17 AM
preeti:
you have valid observations and what you say may be applicable now
my caveat hinted at a society that goes from two to fifty plus channels over time...and as the viewers get a choice they become discerning and selective over the shenanigans of different channels and news broadcasters....much like happens here
Add your comment